Questions and Comments on the Constitutional Provisions Regarding the Election of Congressmen

[THE FEDERAL FARMER] (excerpt)

The qualifications of the representatives are also fixed and designated, and no person under 25 years of age,
not an inhabitant of the state, and not having been seven years a citizen of the United States, can be elected.
The clear inference is, that all persons 25 years of age, and upwards, inhabitants of the state, and having been,
at any period or periods, seven years citizens of the United States, may be elected representatives. They have a
right to be elected by the constitution, and the electors have a right to choose them. This is fixing the federal
representation, as to the elected, on a very broad basis. It can be no objection to the elected, that they are Christians,
Pagans, Mahometans, or Jews....

Anti-Federalist 63

On the Organization and Powers of the Senate (Part 2)

April 10, 1788 [Brutus] (excerpt)

New York-Journal:

The senate, as a legislative branch, is not large, but as an executive branch quite too numerous. It is not to be presumed
that we can form a genuine senatorial branch in the United States, a real representation of the aristocracy and balance in the
legislature, any more than we can form a genuine representation of the people. Could we separate the aristocratical and democratical
interest, compose the senate of the former, and the house of assembly of the latter, they are too unequal in the United States to produce
a balance. Form them on pure principles, and leave each to be supported by its real weight and connections, the senate would be feeble
and the house powerful. I say, on pure principles; because I make a distinction between a senate that derives its weight and influence
from a pure source-its numbers and wisdom, its extensive property, its extensive and permanent connections -and a senate composed of
a few men, possessing small property, and small and unstable connections....

Anti-Federalist 62

On the Organization and Powers of the Senate (Part 1)

April 10, 1788 [Brutus] (excerpt)

New York-Journal:

The apportionment of members of the Senate among the States is not according to numbers,
or the importance of the States, but is equal. This, on the plan of a consolidated government,
is unequal and improper; but is proper on the system of confederation - on this principle I approve
of it. It is indeed the only feature of any importance in the constitution of a confederated government.
It was obtained after a vigorous struggle of that part of the Convention who were in favor of preserving
the state governments. It is to be regretted that they were not able to have infused other principles into
the plan, to have secured the government of the respective states, and to have marked with sufficient
precision the line between them and the general government. ....

Anti-Federalist 64

On the Organization and Powers of the Senate (Part 3)

November 22, 1787 [CINCINNATUS] (excerpt)

New York Journal:

I come now, sir, to the most exceptionable part of the Constitution-the Senate. In this, as in every other
part, you [James Wilson of Pennsylvania] are in the line of your profession Law], and on that ground assure
your fellow citizens, that-"perhaps there never was a charge made with less reason, than that which predicts
the institution of a baneful aristocracy in the Federal Senate." And yet your conscience smote you, sir, at
the beginning, and compelled you to prefix a perhaps to this strange assertion. The senate, you say, branches
into two characters-the one legislative and the other executive. This phraseology is quaint, and the position
does not state the whole truth. I am very sorry, sir, to be so often obliged to reprehend the suppression of
information at the moment that you stood forth to instruct your fellow citizens, in what they were supposed
not to understand....